UNHuman Development Index (HDI) for 2004, derived from 2006 UN HDI report. An HDI below 0.5 is considered to represent low development and an HDI 0.8 or more is considered to represent high development.

0.950 + 0.900-0.949 0.850-0.899 0.800-0.849 0.750-0.799

0.700-0.749 0.650-0.699 0.600-0.649 0.550-0.599 0.500-0.549

0.450-0.499 0.400-0.449 0.350-0.399 0.300-0.349 under 0.300 n/a

People with red-green color vision deficiency should click here for a map which has been modified for accessibility.

Neocolonialism is a term used by post-colonial critics of developed countries' involvement in the developing world. Writings within the theoretical framework of neocolonialism argue that existing or past internationaleconomic arrangements created by former colonial powers were or are used to maintain control of their former colonies and dependencies after the colonial independence movements of the post-World War II period. The term neocolonialism can combine a critique of current actualcolonialism (where some states continue administrating foreign territories and their populations in violation of United Nations resolutions[1]) and a critique of the involvement of modern capitalist businesses in nations which were former colonies. Critics adherent to neocolonialism contend that multinational corporations continue to exploit the resources of post-colonial states, and that this economic control inherent to neocolonialism is akin to the classical, European colonialism practiced from the 16th to the 20th centuries. In broader usage, neocolonialism may simply refer to the involvement of powerful countries in the affairs of less powerful countries; this is especially relevant in modern Latin America. In this sense, neocolonialism implies a form of contemporary, economic imperialism: that powerful nations behave like colonial powers of imperialism, and that this behavior is likened to colonialism in a post-colonial world.

Neocolonialism charges against former colonial powers

Kwame Nkrumah, first president of Ghana, and one of the coiners of the term "neocolonialism", pictured on a Soviet stamp (1972).

The term neocolonialism first saw widespread use, particularly in reference to Africa, soon after the process of decolonization which followed a struggle by many national independence movements in the colonies following World War II. Upon gaining independence, some national leaders and opposition groups argued that their countries were being subjected to a new form of colonialism, waged by the former colonial powers and other developed nations. Kwame Nkrumah, who in 1957 became leader of newly independent Ghana, was an early proponent of what became the classical definition of neocolonialism. This definition of neocolonialism is outlined in one of the first books to use term, Nkrumah's Neo-Colonialism, the Last Stage of Imperialism (1965).[3] The work is self-defined as an extension of Lenin's Imperialism, the Last Stage of Capitalism (1916), in which Lenin argues that 19th century imperialism is predicated upon the needs of the capitalist system.[4] Nkrumah argues that "In place of colonialism as the main instrument of imperialism we have today neo-colonialism. [...] Neo-colonialism, like colonialism, is an attempt to export the social conflicts of the capitalist countries." He continues:

The result of neo-colonialism is that foreign capital is used for the exploitation rather than for the development of the less developed parts of the world. Investment under neo-colonialism increases rather than decreases the gap between the rich and the poor countries of the world. The struggle against neo-colonialism is not aimed at excluding the capital of the developed world from operating in less developed countries. It is aimed at preventing the financial power of the developed countries being used in such a way as to impoverish the less developed.[5]

Denunciations of neocolonialism also became popular with some national independence movements while they were still waging anti-colonial armed struggle. During the 1970s, in the Portuguese colonies of Mozambique and Angola for example, the rhetoric espoused by the Marxist movements FRELIMO and MPLA, which were to eventually assume power upon those nations' independence, rejected both traditional colonialism and neocolonialism.

Paternalistic neocolonialism

The term paternalistic neocolonialism involves the belief held by a neo-colonial power that their colonial subjects benefit from their occupation. Critics of neocolonialism, arguing that this is both exploitive and racist, contend this is merely a justification for continued political hegemony and economic exploitation of past colonies, and that such justifications are the modern reformulation of the Civilizing mission concepts of the 19th century.

Françafrique

Foreign mercenaries, like these United States and British veterans training anti-insurgency troops in Sierra Leone, are often accused of being instruments of Neocolonial powers. French government minister Jacques Foccart was alleged to have used mercenaries like Bob Denard to maintain friendly governments or overthrow unfriendly governments in France's former colonies.

The classic example used to define modern neocolonialism is Françafrique: a term that refers to the continuing close relationship between France and some leaders of its former African colonies. It was first used by president of the Côte d'Ivoire Félix Houphouët-Boigny, who appears to have used it in a positive sense, to refer to good relations between France and Africa, but it was subsequently borrowed by critics of this close (and they would say) unbalanced relationship. Jacques Foccart, who from 1960 was chief of staff for African matters for president Charles de Gaulle (1958–69) and then Georges Pompidou (1969–1974), is claimed to be the leading exponent of Françafrique.[7] The term was coined by François-Xavier Verschave as the title of his criticism of French policies in Africa: La Françafrique, The longest Scandal of the Republic.[8]

In 1972, Mongo Beti, a writer in exile from Cameroon published Main basse sur le Cameroun, autopsie d'une décolonisation ('Cruel hand on Cameroon, autopsy of a decolonization'), a critical history of recent Cameroon, which asserted that Cameroon and other colonies remained under French control in all but name, and that the post-independence political elites had actively fostered this continued dependence.

Verschave, Beti and others point to a forty year post independence relationship with nations of the former African colonies, whereby French troops maintain forces on the ground (often used by friendly African leaders to quell revolts) and French corporations maintain monopolies on foreign investment (usually in the form of extraction of natural resources). French troops in Africa were (and it is argued, still are) often involved in coup d'états resulting in a regime acting in the interests of France but against its country's own interests.

Francophonie

The French Community and the later Organisation Internationale de la Francophonie are defined by critics as agents of French neocolonial influence, especially in Africa. While the main thrust of this claim is that the Francophonie organisation is a front for French dominance of post-colonial nations, the relation with the French language is often more complex. Algerian intellectual Kateb Yacine wrote in 1966 that

Francophonie is a neocolonial political machine, which only perpetuates our alienation, but the usage of French language does not mean that one is an agent of a foreign power, and I write in French to tell the French that I am not French. [9][10][citation needed]

United Kingdom

Critics of British relations with its former African colonies point out that the United Kingdom viewed itself as a "civilizing force" bringing "progress" and modernization to its colonies. This mindset, they argue, has enabled continued military and economic dominance in some of its former colonies, and has been seen again following British intervention in Sierra Leone.[11]

"We, politely referred to as 'underdeveloped', in truth are colonial, semi-colonial or dependent countries. We are countries whose economies have been distorted by imperialism, which has abnormally developed those branches of industry or agriculture needed to complement its complex economy. 'Underdevelopment', or distorted development, brings a dangerous specialization in raw materials, inherent in which is the threat of hunger for all our peoples. We, the 'underdeveloped', are also those with the single crop, the single product, the single market. A single product whose uncertain sale depends on a single market imposing and fixing conditions. That is the great formula for imperialist economic domination."

In broader usage the charge of Neocolonialism has been leveled at powerful countries and transnational economic institutions who involve themselves in the affairs of less powerful countries. In this sense, 'Neo'colonialism implies a form of contemporary, economic Imperialism: that powerful nations behave 'like colonial powers, and that this behavior is 'likened to' colonialism in a post-colonial world.

Both previous colonizing states and other powerful economic states maintain a continuing presence in the economies of former colonies, especially where it concerns raw materials. Stronger nations are thus charged with interfering in the governance and economics of weaker nations to maintain the flow of such material, at prices and under conditions which unduly benefit developed nations and trans-national corporations.

Dependency theory

The concept of economic neocolonialism was given a theoretical basis, in part, through the work of Dependency theory. This body of social science theories, both from developed and developing nations, is predicated on the notion that there is a center of wealthy states and a periphery of poor, underdeveloped states. Resources are extracted from the periphery and flow towards the states at the center in order to sustain their economic growth and wealth. A central concept is that the poverty of the countries in the periphery is the result of the manner of their integration of the "world system", a view to be contrasted with that of free market economists, who argue that such states are progressing on a path to full integration. This theory is based on the Marxist analysis of inequalities within the world system, dependency argues that underdevelopment of the Global South is a direct result of the development in the Global North. Neocolonialism originates from the Latin concept of letting one rule for the success of all

The basis of much of this Marxist theory is in theories of the "semi-colony", which date back to the late 19th century.[13]

Proponents of such theories include Federico Brito Figueroa a Venezuelan historian who has written widely on the socioeconomic underpinnings of both colonialism and neocolonialism. Brito's works and theories strongly influenced the thinking of current Venezuelan president Hugo Chávez.

The Cold War

In the late 20th century conflict between the Soviet Union and the United States, the charge of Neocolonialism was often aimed at Western[14][15][16][17][18] -- and less often, Soviet[19][20] -- involvement in the affairs of developing nations. Proxy Wars, many in former colonised nations, were funded by both sides throughout this period. Cuba, the Soviet bloc, Egypt under Nasser, as well as some governments of newly independent African states, charged the United States with supporting regimes which they felt did not represent the will of their peoples, and by means both covert and overt, toppling governments which rejected the United States. The Tricontinental Conference, chaired by Moroccan politician Mehdi Ben Barka was one such organisation. Roughly designated as part of the Third World movement, it supported revolutionaryanti-colonial action in various states, provoking the anger of the United States and France. Ben Barka himself led what was called the Commission on Neocolonialism of the organisation, which focused both on the involvement of former colonial powers in post colonial states, but also contended that the United States, as leader of the capitalist world, with the primary Neocolonialist power. Much speculation remains about Ben Barka disappearance in 1965. The Tricontinental Conference was succeeded organisation such as Cuba's OSPAAAL (Spanish for "Organization for Solidarity with the People of Africa, Asia and Latin America"). Such organisations, feeding into what became the Non-aligned Movement of the 1960s and 70s used Neocolonialism, in much the same way as Marxist dependency theory intellectuals did, to encompass all capitalist nations, and most especially the United States. This usage remains popular on the political left today, most especially in Latin America.

Multinational corporations

Critics of neocolonialism also argue that investment by multinational corporations enriches few in underdeveloped countries, and causes humanitarian, environmental and ecological devastation to the populations which inhabit the neocolonies. This, it is argued, results in unsustainable development and perpetual underdevelopment; a dependency which cultivates those countries as reservoirs of cheap labor and raw materials, while restricting their access to advanced production techniques to develop their own economies. In some countries, privatization of national resources, while initially leading to immediate large scale influx of investment capital, is often followed by dramatic increases in the rate of unemployment, poverty, and a decline in per-capita income.[21] This is particularly true in the West African nations of Guinea-Bissau, Senegal, and Mauritania where fishing has historically been central to the local economy. Beginning in 1979, the European Union began brokering fishing rights contracts off the coast of West Africa. This continues to this day. Commercial unsustainable over-fishing from foreign corporations have played a significant role in the large-scale unemployment and migration of people across the region.[22] This stands in direct opposition to United Nations Treaty on the Seas which recognizes the importance of fishing to local communities and insists that government fishing agreements with foreign companies should be targeted at surplus stocks only.[23]

International financial institutions

Critics of neocolonialism portray the choice to grant or to refuse granting loans (particularly those financing otherwise unpayable Third World debt), especially by international financial institutions such as the International Monetary Fund (IMF), and the World Bank (WB), as a decisive form of control. They argue that in order to qualify for these loans, and other forms of economic aid, weaker nations are forced to take certain steps favorable to the financial interests of the IMF and World Bank but detrimental to their own economies. These structural adjustments have the effect of increasing rather than alleviating poverty within the nation. Some critics emphasize that neocolonialism allows certain cartels of states, such as the World Bank, to control and exploit usually lesser developed countries (LDCs) by fostering debt. In effect, third world governments give concessions and monopolies to foreign corporations in return for consolidation of power and monetary bribes. In most cases, much of the money loaned to these LDCs is returned to the favored foreign corporations. Thus, these foreign loans are in effect subsidies to corporations of the loaning state's. This collusion is sometimes referred to as the corporatocracy. Organizations accused of participating in neo-imperialism include the World Bank, World Trade Organization and Group of Eight, and the World Economic Forum. Various "first world" states, notably the United States, are said to be involved, as described in Confessions of an Economic Hit Man by John Perkins.

Neocolonialism allegations against the IMF

Those who argue that neocolonialism historically supplemented (and later supplanted) colonialism, point to the fact that Africa today pays more money every year in debt service payments to the IMF and World Bank than it receives in loans from them, thereby often depriving the inhabitants of those countries from actual necessities. This dependency allows the IMF and World Bank to impose Structural Adjustment Plans upon these nations. Adjustments largely consisting of privatization programs which result in deteriorating health, education, an inability to develop infrastructure, and in general, lower living standards.

They also point to recent statements made by United Nations Secretary-General's Special Economic Adviser, Professor Jeffrey Sachs, who heatedly demanded that the entire African debt (approximately $200 billion) be forgiven outright and recommended that African nations simply stop paying if the World Bank and IMF do not reciprocate:

The time has come to end this charade. The debts are unaffordable. If they won't cancel the debts I would suggest obstruction; you do it yourselves. Africa should say: 'thank you very much but we need this money to meet the needs of children who are dying right now so we will put the debt servicing payments into urgent social investment in health, education, drinking water, control of AIDS and other needs.' (Professor Jeffrey Sachs, Director of The Earth Institute at Columbia University and Special Economic Advisor to UN Secretary General Kofi Annan).

Critics of the IMF have conducted studies as to the effects of its policy which demands currencydevaluations. They pose the argument that the IMF requires these devaluations as a condition for refinancing loans, while simultaneously insisting that the loan be repaid in dollars or other First World currencies against which the underdeveloped country's currency had been devalued. This, they say, increases the respective debt by the same percentage of the currency being devalued, therefore amounting to a scheme for keeping Third World nations in perpetual indebtedness, impoverishment and neocolonial dependence.

Alternatives to IMF Influence

Due to its large cash reserves, the Chinese government has begun playing a significant role as counter-weight to IMF influence. Its often lax lending requirements have led some countries, such as Angola in 2006, to eschew all previously planned IMF loans.[24]

Sino-African relations

In recent years, the People's Republic of China has built increasingly stronger ties with African nations.[25][26] China is currently Africa's second largest trading partner, after the United States. As of August 2007, there were an estimated 750,000 Chinese nationals working or living for extended periods in different African countries.[27][28] China is picking up natural resources — oil, precious minerals — to feed its expanding economy and new markets for its burgeoning enterprises.[29][30] In 2006, two-way trade had increased to $50 billion.[31]

Not all dealings have involved direct monetary exchanges. In 2007, the governments of China and Congo-Kinshasa entered into an agreement whereby Chinese state-owned firms would provide various services (infrastructure projects) in exchange for access to an equivalent amount of materials extracted from Congolese copper mines.[24]

Human rights advocates and opponents of the Sudanese government portray China's role in providing weapons and aircraft as a cynical attempt to obtain petroleum and natural gas just as colonial powers once supplied African chieftains with the military means to maintain control as they extracted natural resources.[32][33][34] According to China's critics, China has offered Sudan support threatening to use its veto on the U.N. Security Council to protect Khartoum from sanctions and has been able to water down every resolution on Darfur in order to protect its interests in Sudan.[35]

South Korea's land acquisitions

Rich governments and powerful multinationals from South Korea are rapidly buying up the rights to millions of hectares of agricultural land in developing countries in an effort to secure its own long-term food supplies. The fact that South Korea is no longer "importing" food and resources that is being cultivated overseas implies that these lands are effectively Korean. This amounts to agricultural imperialism, a new form of neocolonialism.[36] South Korea's largely mountainous land area of just over 100,000 square kilometer houses a population of nearly 50 million, yet the country's highly industrialized trillion dollar economy was almost as large as the economy of the entire African continent in 2007.[37] Hence, the South Korean government is now using its massive financial resources to purchase cheap land overseas for energy and food, in order to fuel one of the world's fastest growing advanced economies.

South Korea's RG Energy Resources Asset Management CEO Park Yong-soo stressed that "the nation does not produce a single drop of crude oil and other key industrial minerals. To power economic growth and support people's livelihoods, we cannot emphasize too much that securing natural resources in foreign countries is a must for our future survival."[38] The head of the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO), Jacques Diouf, has warned that the controversial rise in land deals could create a form of "neo-colonialism", with poor states producing food for the rich at the expense of their own hungry people.

In 2008, the South Korean multinational Daewoo Logistics secured 1.3 million hectares of farmland in Madagascar, half the size of Belgium, to grow maize and crops for biofuels. Roughly half of the country's arable land, as well as rainforests of rich and unique biodiversity, were to be converted into palm and corn monocultures, producing food for export from a country where a third of the population and 50 percent of children under 5 are malnourished, using workers imported from South Africa instead of locals. Those living on the land were never consulted or informed, despite being dependent on the land for food and income. The controversial deal played a major part in prolonged anti-government protests on the island that resulted in over a hundred deaths.[36] Shortly after the Madagascar deal, Tanzania announced that South Korea was in talks to develop 100,000 hectares for food production and processing for 700 to 800 billion won. Scheduled to be completed in 2010, it will be the largest single piece of agricultural infrastructure South Korea has ever built overseas.[36]

The South Korean government's strategy is quickly yielding results and despite predicting that farmland is shrinking on the country, the government announced in Augsut 2009 that South Korea would enjoy a 10% increase in rice production in 2009, the first since 2005, yet there are already pile-ups of mountains of rice purchased by the government to keep rice prices stable.[36]

Other approaches to the concept of neocolonialism

Although the concept of neocolonialism was originally developed within a Marxist theoretical framework and is generally employed by the political left, the term Neocolonialism is also used within other theoretical frameworks.

Cultural theory

One variant of neocolonialism theory critiques the existence of cultural colonialism, the desire of wealthy nations to control other nations' values and perceptions through cultural means, such as media, language, education and religion, ultimately for economic reasons.

One element of this is a critique of "Colonial Mentality" which writers have traced well beyond the legacy of 19th century colonial empires. These critics argue that people, once subject to colonial or imperial rule, latch onto physical and cultural differences between the foreigners and themselves, leading some to associate power and success with the foreigners' ways. This eventually leads to the foreigners' ways being regarded as the better way and being held in a higher esteem than previous indigenous ways. In much the same fashion, and with the same reasoning of better-ness, the colonised may over time equate the colonisers' race or ethnicity itself as being responsible for their superiority. Cultural rejections of colonialism, such as the Negritude movement, or simply the embracing of seemingly authentic local culture are then seen in a post colonial world as a necessary part of the struggle against domination. By the same reasoning, importation or continuation of cultural mores or elements from former colonial powers may be regarded as a form of Neocolonialism.

In postcolonialism theory

Postcolonialism is a set of theories in philosophy, film, political sciences and literature that deal with the cultural legacy of colonial rule. Postcolonialism deals with cultural identity in colonized societies, referencing neocolonialism as the background for contemporary dilemmas of developing a national identity after colonial rule: the ways in which writers articulate and celebrate that identity (often reclaiming it from and maintaining strong connections with the colonizer); the ways in which the knowledge of the colonized (subordinated) people has been generated and used to serve the colonizer's interests; and the ways in which the colonizer's literature has justified colonialism via images of the colonized as a perpetually inferior people, society and culture.

^ Wallerstein, p 52: 'It attempted the one serious, collectively agreed upon definition of neocolonialism, the key concept in the armory of the revolutionary core of the movement for African unity.' Also William D. Graf, review of Yolamu R. Barongo, Neocolonialism and African Politics: a Survey of the Impact of Neocolonialism on African Political Behaviour (1980); Canadian Journal of African Studies, p 601: 'The term itself originated in Africa, probably with Nkrumah, and received collective recognition at the 1961 All-African People's Conference.'

^ Kaye Whiteman The man who ran Francafrique - French politician Jacques Foccart's role in France's colonization of Africa under the leadership of Charles de Gaulle - Obituary in The National Interest, Fall, 1997.

^ Rosemary Radford Ruether. Christianity and Social Systems: Historical Constructions and Ethical Challenges. Rowman & Littlefield, (2008) ISBN 0742546438 p. 138: "Neocolonialism means that European powers and the United States no longer rule dependent territories directly through their occupying troops and imperial bureaucracy. Rather, they control the area's resources indirectly through business corporations and the financial lending institutions they dominate..."

^ Yumna Siddiqi. Anxieties of Empire and the Fiction of Intrigue. Columbia University Press, (2007) ISBN 0231138083 pp.123-124 giving the classical definition limited to US and European colonial powers.

^ Hugh Seton-Watson. Nations and states: an enquiry into the origins of nations and the politics of nationalism. Taylor & Francis, (1977) ISBN 0416768105 Seton-Watson gives the traditional history of the word neocolonialism as a anti-capitalist term, (pp.339-339), but uses it to apply to the Soviet bloc as well (p.322, passim)

Yolamu R Barongo. Neocolonialism and African politics: A survey of the impact of neocolonialism on African political behavior (Vantage Press, NY, 1980).

Mongo Beti, Main basse sur le Cameroun. Autopsie d'une décolonisation (1972), new edition La Découverte, Paris 2003 [A classical critique of neocolonialism. Raymond Marcellin, the French Minister of the Interior at the time, tried to prohibit the book. It could only be published after fierce legal battles.]